The majority voted against amendments introduced by Liberal MP Malcolm Turnbull, which means that they were unsuccessful. Mr Turnbull explained that these amendments related to merit review and procedural fairness.(Read Mr Turnbull's full explanation and the associated debate here, after 6:35 pm. )

According to the bills digest, significant changes made by this bill include:

improving the conditions for competition in telecommunications markets by requiring Telstra to be structurally or functionally separated

making the telecommunications access regime less susceptible to deliberate delay and obstruction

removing a technical impediment to the operation of the anti-competitive conduct regime applying to telecommunications markets

clarifying the universal service obligation (USO) and customer service guarantee (CSG) to make it more enforceable

extending the obligation to provide priority assistance to those with life threatening conditions to service providers other than Telstra, and

enabling breaches of civil penalty provisions - including some concerning the USO and the CSG - to be dealt with by issuing infringement notices.(More information about the bill is available in its bills digest.)

With these measures, the bill seeks to address the issues that result from the monopoly caused by Telstra's vertically and horizontally integrated telecommunications network.

Mr Turnbull explained that the amendments related to the disallowance of instruments and competition. He said that their purpose was to: (1) replace ‘in writing’ with the words ‘in a legislative instrument’ so that any ministerial direction to the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission regarding the criteria for acceptance of a functional separation would be a disallowable instrument and therefore subject to the scrutiny of parliament; and (2) ensure that the normal operation of the Competition and Consumer Act, formerly the Trade Practices Act, would apply to the deal involving Telstra and NBN Co.(Read Mr Turnbull's full explanation and the associated debate here, after 5:39 pm. )

According to the bills digest, significant changes made by this bill include:

improving the conditions for competition in telecommunications markets by requiring Telstra to be structurally or functionally separated

making the telecommunications access regime less susceptible to deliberate delay and obstruction

removing a technical impediment to the operation of the anti-competitive conduct regime applying to telecommunications markets

clarifying the universal service obligation (USO) and customer service guarantee (CSG) to make it more enforceable

extending the obligation to provide priority assistance to those with life threatening conditions to service providers other than Telstra, and

enabling breaches of civil penalty provisions - including some concerning the USO and the CSG - to be dealt with by issuing infringement notices.(More information about the bill is available in its bills digest.)

With these measures, the bill seeks to address the issues that result from the monopoly caused by Telstra's vertically and horizontally integrated telecommunications network.

Mr Turnbull explained that "[t]hese amendments serve to remove the ‘gun at the head’ provisions of the [bill] which provide ministerial discretion to bar Telstra from bidding for next-generation 4G wireless spectrum, via a disallowable instrument". He described this as "profoundly offensive" because they "force a private company which was sold to the public as an integrated telecommunications company by the Commonwealth to take, under extreme pressure, certain actions to restructure its own business".(Read Mr Turnbull's full explanation here, after 4:52 pm. )

According to the bills digest, significant changes made by this bill include:

improving the conditions for competition in telecommunications markets by requiring Telstra to be structurally or functionally separated

making the telecommunications access regime less susceptible to deliberate delay and obstruction

removing a technical impediment to the operation of the anti-competitive conduct regime applying to telecommunications markets

clarifying the universal service obligation (USO) and customer service guarantee (CSG) to make it more enforceable

extending the obligation to provide priority assistance to those with life threatening conditions to service providers other than Telstra, and

enabling breaches of civil penalty provisions - including some concerning the USO and the CSG - to be dealt with by issuing infringement notices.(More information about the bill is available in its bills digest.)

With these measures, the bill seeks to address the issues that result from the monopoly caused by Telstra's vertically and horizontally integrated telecommunications network.

The majority voted in favour of a motion to read the bill for a second time.(Read more about the stages that a bill must pass through to become law here. ) This means that the majority agree with the main idea of the bill and that they can now discuss it in more detail.

According to the bills digest, significant changes made by this bill include:

improving the conditions for competition in telecommunications markets by requiring Telstra to be structurally or functionally separated

making the telecommunications access regime less susceptible to deliberate delay and obstruction

removing a technical impediment to the operation of the anti-competitive conduct regime applying to telecommunications markets

clarifying the universal service obligation (USO) and customer service guarantee (CSG) to make it more enforceable

extending the obligation to provide priority assistance to those with life threatening conditions to service providers other than Telstra, and

enabling breaches of civil penalty provisions - including some concerning the USO and the CSG - to be dealt with by issuing infringement notices.(More information about the bill is available in its bills digest.)

With these measures, the bill seeks to address the issues that result from the monopoly caused by Telstra's vertically and horizontally integrated telecommunications network.

The majority voted in favour of a motion to read the bill for a third time.(Read more about the stages that a bill must pass through to become law here. ) This means that the bill is now passed in the House of Representatives and will now be sent to the Senate for their consideration.

causing Telstra to be structurally or functionally separated in order to improve competition within the telecommunications markets

reduce the susceptibility of the telecommunications access regime to deliberate delay and obstruction

removing a technical impediment to the operation of the anti-competitive conduct regime applying to telecommunications markets

making the universal service obligation (USO) and customer service guarantee (CSG) clearer and so more enforceable

extending the obligation to provide priority assistance to those with life threatening conditions to service providers other than Telstra

enabling breaches of civil penalty provisions - including some concerning the USO and the CSG - to be dealt with by the issue of infringement notices.(Read more about these changes in the bills digest (678 KB).)

The majority voted in favour of a motion to read the bill for a second time.(Read more about the stages that a bill must pass through to become law here. ) This means that the majority agree with the main idea of the bill and that they can now discuss it in more detail.

causing Telstra to be structurally or functionally separated in order to improve competition within the telecommunications markets

reduce the susceptibility of the telecommunications access regime to deliberate delay and obstruction

removing a technical impediment to the operation of the anti-competitive conduct regime applying to telecommunications markets

making the universal service obligation (USO) and customer service guarantee (CSG) clearer and so more enforceable

extending the obligation to provide priority assistance to those with life threatening conditions to service providers other than Telstra

enabling breaches of civil penalty provisions - including some concerning the USO and the CSG - to be dealt with by the issue of infringement notices.(Read more about these changes in the bills digest (678 KB).)

The majority voted in favour of a motion that the bill be read for a third time.(Read more about the stages that a bill must pass through to become law here. ) This means that the bill is now passed in the House of Representatives and that it will now be sent to the Senate for their consideration.

Background to the bill

This bill was introduced along with the National Fuelwatch (Empowering Consumers) Bill 2008 to establish a National Fuelwatch Scheme, which would be created and administered by by the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC).(Read more about the Scheme on ABC News here. ) The National Fuelwatch Scheme would require petrol retailers "to notify the ACCC of their next day’s fuel prices by 2 pm each day and maintain this notified price for a 24-hour period from 6 am the next day".(Read more about the bill, including its explanatory memorandum, here. )

The National Fuelwatch Scheme was proposed in response to an ACCC inquiry into the price of unleaded petrol, which found that:

there is an imbalance in fuel pricing information between petrol retailers and consumers at the retail level; and

consumers' capacity to take advantage of the lowest prices is limited by intraday fuel price changes (sometimes as often as three or four times per day).(Read more about the ACCC's inquiry in the explanatory memorandum.)

The majority voted in favour of a motion that the bill be read for a second time.(Read more about the stages that a bill must pass through to become law here. ) This means that the majority agree with the main idea of the bill and that the House can now discuss it in more detail.

Background to the bill

This bill was introduced along with the National Fuelwatch (Empowering Consumers) Bill 2008 to establish a National Fuelwatch Scheme, which would be created and administered by by the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC).(Read more about the Scheme on ABC News here. ) The National Fuelwatch Scheme would require petrol retailers "to notify the ACCC of their next day’s fuel prices by 2 pm each day and maintain this notified price for a 24-hour period from 6 am the next day".(Read more about the bill, including its explanatory memorandum, here. )

The National Fuelwatch Scheme was proposed in response to an ACCC inquiry into the price of unleaded petrol, which found that:

there is an imbalance in fuel pricing information between petrol retailers and consumers at the retail level; and

consumers' capacity to take advantage of the lowest prices is limited by intraday fuel price changes (sometimes as often as three or four times per day).(Read more about the ACCC's inquiry in the explanatory memorandum.)

The majority voted in favour of a motion that the bill be read for a third time.(Read more about the stages that a bill must pass through to become law here. ) This means that the bill has passed in the House of Representatives and that it will now be sent to the Senate.

The National Fuelwatch Scheme was proposed in response to an ACCC inquiry into the price of unleaded petrol, which found that:

there is an imbalance in fuel pricing information between petrol retailers and consumers at the retail level; and

consumers' capacity to take advantage of the lowest prices is limited by intraday fuel price changes (sometimes as often as three or four times per day).(Read more about the ACCC's inquiry in the explanatory memorandum.)

The majority voted in favour of a motion that the bill be read for a second time.(Read more about the stages that a bill must pass through to become law here. ) This means that the majority agree with the main idea of the bill and that the House can now discuss it in more detail.

The National Fuelwatch Scheme was proposed in response to an ACCC inquiry into the price of unleaded petrol, which found that:

there is an imbalance in fuel pricing information between petrol retailers and consumers at the retail level; and

consumers' capacity to take advantage of the lowest prices is limited by intraday fuel price changes (sometimes as often as three or four times per day).(Read more about the ACCC's inquiry in the explanatory memorandum.)

The majority voted in favour of a motion "That the words proposed to be omitted (Mr Dutton’s amendment) stand part of the question", which means that the words will remain as they are.

Liberal MP Peter Dutton had proposed to amend the original second reading motion "That this bill be now read a second time" with the following:(Read Mr Dutton's explanation of his amendment here. ) That all words after “That” be omitted with a view to substituting the following words: “the House declines to give the bill a second reading and rejects in particular the obligation that fuel prices be fixed for 24 hours.”

Because the majority wanted the words of the original second reading to remain unchanged, it could now be put.(See the second reading division here. )

The National Fuelwatch Scheme was proposed in response to an ACCC inquiry into the price of unleaded petrol, which found that:

there is an imbalance in fuel pricing information between petrol retailers and consumers at the retail level; and

consumers' capacity to take advantage of the lowest prices is limited by intraday fuel price changes (sometimes as often as three or four times per day).(Read more about the ACCC's inquiry in the explanatory memorandum.)

No

Yes

Passed by a small majority

How
"voted very strongly against"
is worked out

The MP's votes count towards a weighted average where the most important votes get
50 points,
less important votes get
10 points,
and less important votes for which the MP was absent get
2 points.
In important votes the MP gets awarded the full
50 points
for voting the same as the policy,
0 points
for voting against the policy, and
25 points
for not voting. In less important votes, the MP gets
10 points
for voting with the policy,
0 points
for voting against, and
1
(out of 2)
if absent.

Then, the number gets converted to a simple english language phrase based on the range of values it's within.

No of votes

Points

Out of

Most important votes (50 points)

MP voted with policy

0

0

0

MP voted against policy

7

0

350

MP absent

0

0

0

Less important votes (10 points)

MP voted with policy

0

0

0

MP voted against policy

4

0

40

Less important absentees (2 points)

MP absent*

0

0

0

Total:

0

390

*Pressure of other work means MPs or
Senators are not always available to vote – it does not always
indicate they have abstained. Therefore, being absent on a less
important vote makes a disproportionatly small
difference.